Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein trav­els across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Britain, Greece, and Australia to witness the reality of disaster capitalism. He discovers how companies such as G4S, Serco, and Halliburton cash in on or­ganized misery in a hidden world of privatized detention centers, militarized private security, aid profiteering, and destructive mining.

Disaster has become big business. Talking to immigrants stuck in limbo in Britain or visiting immigration centers in America, Loewenstein maps the secret networks formed to help cor­porations bleed what profits they can from economic crisis. He debates with Western contractors in Afghanistan, meets the locals in post-earthquake Haiti, and in Greece finds a country at the mercy of vulture profiteers. In Papua New Guinea, he sees a local commu­nity forced to rebel against predatory resource companies and NGOs.

What emerges through Loewenstein’s re­porting is a dark history of multinational corpo­rations that, with the aid of media and political elites, have grown more powerful than national governments. In the twenty-first century, the vulnerable have become the world’s most valu­able commodity. Disaster Capitalism is published by Verso in 2015 and in paperback in January 2017.

Vulture capitalism has seen the corporation become more powerful than the state, and yet its work is often done by stealth, supported by political and media elites. The result is privatised wars and outsourced detention centres, mining companies pillaging precious land in developing countries and struggling nations invaded by NGOs and the corporate dollar.
Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein travels to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea and across Australia to witness the reality of this largely hidden world of privatised detention centres, outsourced aid, destructive resource wars and militarized private security. Who is involved and why? Can it be stopped? What are the alternatives in a globalised world? Profits of Doom, published in 2013 and released in an updated edition in 2014, challenges the fundamentals of our unsustainable way of life and the money-making imperatives driving it. It is released in an updated edition in 2014.

Four Australian thinkers come together to ask and answer the big questions, such as: What is the nature of the universe? Doesn't religion cause most of the conflict in the world? And Where do we find hope?
We are introduced to different belief systems – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – and to the argument that atheism, like organised religion, has its own compelling logic. And we gain insight into the life events that led each author to their current position.
Jane Caro flirted briefly with spiritual belief, inspired by 19th century literary heroines such as Elizabeth Gaskell and the Bronte sisters. Antony Loewenstein is proudly culturally, yet unconventionally, Jewish. Simon Smart is firmly and resolutely a Christian, but one who has had some of his most profound spiritual moments while surfing. Rachel Woodlock grew up in the alternative embrace of Baha'i belief but became entranced by its older parent religion, Islam.
Provocative, informative and passionately argued, For God's Sake, published in 2013, encourages us to accept religious differences, but to also challenge more vigorously the beliefs that create discord.

After Zionism, published in 2012 and 2013 with co-editor Ahmed Moor, brings together some of the world s leading thinkers on the Middle East question to dissect the century-long conflict between Zionism and the Palestinians, and to explore possible forms of a one-state solution.
Time has run out for the two-state solution because of the unending and permanent Jewish colonization of Palestinian land. Although deep mistrust exists on both sides of the conflict, growing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and Arabs are working together to forge a different, unified future. Progressive and realist ideas are at last gaining a foothold in the discourse, while those influenced by the colonial era have been discredited or abandoned. Whatever the political solution may be, Palestinian and Israeli lives are intertwined, enmeshed, irrevocably.
This daring and timely collection includes essays by Omar Barghouti, Jonathan Cook, Joseph Dana, Jeremiah Haber, Jeff Halper, Ghada Karmi, Antony Loewenstein, Saree Makdisi, John Mearsheimer, Ahmed Moor, Ilan Pappe, Sara Roy and Phil Weiss.

The 2008 financial crisis opened the door for a bold, progressive social movement. But despite widespread revulsion at economic inequity and political opportunism, after the crash very little has changed.
Has the Left failed? What agenda should progressives pursue? And what alternatives do they dare to imagine?
Left Turn, published by Melbourne University Press in 2012 and co-edited with Jeff Sparrow, is aimed at the many Australians disillusioned with the political process. It includes passionate and challenging contributions by a diverse range of writers, thinkers and politicians, from Larissa Berendht and Christos Tsiolkas to Guy Rundle and Lee Rhiannon. These essays offer perspectives largely excluded from the mainstream. They offer possibilities for resistance and for a renewed struggle for change.

The Blogging Revolution, released by Melbourne University Press in 2008, is a colourful and revelatory account of bloggers around the globe why live and write under repressive regimes - many of them risking their lives in doing so.
Antony Loewenstein's travels take him to private parties in Iran and Egypt, internet cafes in Saudi Arabia and Damascus, to the homes of Cuban dissidents and into newspaper offices in Beijing, where he discovers the ways in which the internet is threatening the ruld of governments.
Through first-hand investigations, he reveals the complicity of Western multinationals in assisting the restriction of information in these countries and how bloggers are leading the charge for change.
The blogging revolution is a superb examination about the nature of repression in the twenty-first century and the power of brave individuals to overcome it.
It was released in an updated edition in 2011, post the Arab revolutions, and an updated Indian print version in 2011.

Subscribe

Donate

Search

“The Israeli government is planning to give up a large slice of land to American Christian evangelicals to build a biblical theme park by the Sea of Galilee where Jesus is said to have walked on water and fed 5,000 with five loaves and two fish.

“A consortium of Christian groups, led by the television evangelist Pat Robertson, is in negotiation with the Israeli ministry of tourism and a deal is expected in the coming months. The project is expected to bring up to 1 million extra tourists a year but an undeclared benefit will be the cementing of a political alliance between the Israeli rightwing and the American Christian right.”

“Israel has suspended contact with evangelist Pat Robertson for suggesting Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s stroke was divine punishment for withdrawing from the Gaza Strip – casting doubt on plans for a Christian tourism centre that would showcase the growing flow of money and influence from U.S. church groups.”

I carry no brief for Pat Robertson, but why is it that you get offended by Christians settling in Israel, but are all for Palestinians/Arabs flooding the joint?

Antony Loewenstein

Of course it does. For many, though, it's a little too complex to understand that not all Arabs are Muslims. Many are indeed Christian.

Wombat

Probably becasue Robertson gives Christians a bad name. Doesn't the Palesitnian population also include Christians?

Shabadoo

Some even were Jews, but they had to leave because of the less-than-enlightened governments in the region.Same actually for many of the Christians (look at the Lebanese X'ians in Oz)…how would you like to be a Copt in Egypt or a Christian in Indonesia or Pakistan (granted not Arab countries)?

neoleftychick

ALYes, and won't the likes of Hanan Ashrawi and yourself thrive under the planned Hamas dimmitude!? Edward Said would have been OK as he was not a Palestinian.

Lisa

Ugh please let me puke. I'm just glad I've been able to get and see the Galilee lake area without having to be assaulted with the sight and sounds of an American theme park. Surely Israel has some kind of limit as to what it will allow to bring in tourist dollars!

Ian Westmore

Shabadoo said… why is it that you get offended by Christians settling in Israel, but are all for Palestinians/Arabs flooding the joint?.Because its their land!But I do think everyone is being so hard on Robertson. He is only stating what the majority American evangelicals, presumably GWB included, believe.

neoleftychick

ian westmoreWHOSE "land?"

Ian Westmore

Arabs

Wilbourne

Antony usually gets narky when someone refers to Arabs as one contiguous grouping without distinctions. I bet that won't be the case here.Israel will perservere as it always has, and the Ian Westmores of the world will complain about it in irrelevant circles as they always have.

James Waterton

Why is it their land? The Arabs were evicted from it fair and square.Population displacement – the story of humanity since day one. Live with it.

orang

James, where have you been?Quick, call the Knesset, tell them your stuff. This will solve everything.

Wombat

Yes bigger guns make you right.

James Waterton

*sigh* It's called dealing with reality, Orang.

Wombat

Cancer patients deal with reality James. Doesn't mean we should stop searching for a treatment.

orang

aaah reality. To be surrounded by a billion muslims. Anytime you choose you can go out and kick their arse (thanks to the big guy standing behind you) And about 99.999% don't really like you. Where's that PR babe of George's?

Wombat

She's busy perfecting the art of opening her mouth to change feet.

neoleftychick

ian westmoreI didn't realise this. So those nich hotels and bars in Tel Aviv are owned by Keysar Trad and the women of Riyadh? How do they all share this Israeli property?Idiot.

Ian Westmore

I didn't realise this. So those nich hotels and bars in Tel Aviv are owned by Keysar Trad and the women of Riyadh? How do they all share this Israeli property?It always amazes me how, given our history, any Australian (or American for that matter) could so happily accept that a people retain land rights even after an absence of 2-3,000 years and that those who've been there in the intervening period have none. I'm a realist so accept that this is one Humpty Dumpty that can't be completely put back so Israel should have some land, perhaps up to the 1967 borders, but to believe, as you seem to, that Israel can take all the land it likes mystifies me. Where are the limits? Abraham hailed from what is now Iraq, so are the Israelis entitled to it and the intervening Jordan, too? And if you consider their claim so powerful, then how much greater do you believe the Aboriginal claim to whatever part of their land you occupy is? After all they were in some cases only dispossessed in the lifetime of the Howard government and have lived here 40-70 times longer than the Israelites occupied Judea?

neoleftychick

ian westmoreThe aborigines already own land that is larger than France. But they are totally irrelevant to this debate.What the hell is all your babbling about Abraham? It is totally irrelevant. Now listen up and learn:1. The Arabs rejected the 1947 UN Partition. Israel did not. 2. A civil war had been brewing in Palestine for decades ever since the al-Husseini-led massacre of 60 civilain Jews in Hebron in 1928; 3. During WW2, the Palestinian Arabs supported Hitler, were responsible for ensuring the capture of fleeing Jews who then went to the gas chambers, and fought alongside Rommel's Nazi army as it moved across northern Africa into Egypt. Now, what SHOULD have happened is ALL the Arabs should have been kicked out of Palestine immediately. After all, the Russians kicked 15 million Germans out Czechslovakia (the Sudentland), there were also massive population transfers between Pakistan and India and between Greece and Turkey in 1922, which involved over 1 million Greeks being given the boot. And yet the Palestinains think they DESERVE a state! 4. The Arabs continued attacking and killing Jews after the Partitition decision was made. Civil War was inevitable. Israel won. No, it wasn't pretty. Yes, the Jews fought with no holds barred. Can you blame them? 5. The day after Israel declared independence (formally recognised by the UN one year later) 7 Arab armies attacked Israel. One of those armies, Jordan, did NOT invade Israel. BUT it did steal the West Bank. There was not a peep about an independent Palestinian state during the 20 years that Jordan held the West Bank. 6. Israel won the 1948 War. Winners of wars started by others get to keep any land they gain. That's the world is. You'd better to learn to live with it. I hope this helps.

orang

ian. ian, ian,ian,ian…….You are comparing apples to apples. For one thing aborigines are "not like us". How many are mentioned in the bible?… how many movies about exodus have they made? -none. .I rest my case.

orang

Well done neo. "6. Israel won the 1948 War. Winners of wars started by others get to keep any land they gain. That's the world is. You'd better to learn to live with it."You omitted the "so there" at the end of the paragraph. Otherwise A+.Just to finish off the list, and to cover your arse about "winners of wars started by others" don't forget Israel also won the 1967 war but they started that one. However, this is where the lawyers came up with that magic word, "Pre-emptive". The arabs were on the verge of attacking so Israel defended itself by attacking 1st.( and wiped out every arab airforce on the ground in the 1st few nanoseconds of the "war". waaahhhhaaaaa!!)Now causus belli – what was that one – oh yes the invasion of the Suez..but that's another story and the US made them leave that one-prob'ly because they were in it with the French and the Brits…actually Israel's done a fair bit of neo-imperialist type stuff ..arabs sure hate imperialism have you noticed…..just thinking out loud ..

James Waterton

I don't occupy any part of the "Aboriginals' land". They were displaced, as they displaced populations before them. The semi-ownership of native title notwithstanding, the Aboriginals own only what they have since bought, as well as collective ownership of government land, shared with all other Australians.Orang : I don't know…a lot of Muslim Arabs seem rather taken with imperialism. From the birth of islam where it was spread by the sword to today's fanatics talking about international caliphates…some fairly strong imperialist themes running through Arabian Muslim society, wouldn't you say?

James Waterton

Addamo – true. The point is, wallowing in denial isn't going to solve anything.By Ian Westmore saying "it's the Arabs' land" is not searching for a cure. It's allowing the cancer to spread.

Ian Westmore

By Ian Westmore saying "it's the Arabs' land" is not searching for a cure. It's allowing the cancer to spread.What is spreading the cancer is allowing ever more and more land to be stolen with everyone pretending not to notice. Pat Robertson publicly stated what both fundamentalist Christians and the Zionists want, though for different reasons, an Israel extending over most of the Levant, maybe more. As I asked earlier, where is the line in the sand? The Jordan border? Iraq's western border? Turkey's southern one?

Ian Westmore

Winners of wars started by others get to keep any land they gain. That's the world is. You'd better to learn to live with it.Given our penchant for starting them, this is a dangerous principle to be promoting, especially if the balance of power changes in our part of the world, as seems possible, whereas the law probably will be.It also runs counter to international law. Yeah, I know Mad King George I has decreed this no longer applies, except when he decides it does, but not even he will be around forever.

James Waterton

Or even Outer Mongolia, Ian?

James Waterton

I hear that those cunning Israelis have some designs on Greenland, even! You know why – green is the colour of Islam – better shut that place down!

orang

James Waterton said… "Orang : I don't know…a lot of Muslim Arabs seem rather taken with imperialism. From the birth of islam where it was spread by the sword to today's fanatics talking about international caliphates…some fairly strong imperialist themes running through Arabian Muslim society, wouldn't you say? "Today's fanatics are – fanatics.The Imperialism I referred to is the one that ruled the Arab's ME up until early to mid 20th century. Coincidently with the creation of Israel was the arabs'independence from British and French rule amongst others. Coincidently many see the recent adventures by the US as ImperialismWhat you are alluding to I believe that historically this is the way it has always been, one "tribe" took over another's territory if it could. Survival of the fittest seems a good way to define it. However, we in the 20th – 21st century have evolved to where the weak have some legal protection. For instance why did we get all hot and bothered about Indonesia invading East Timor?